Kimmi
-
Posts
27,847 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Kimmi
-
2015 Spring Training Games Thread
Kimmi replied to mvp 78's topic in Mike Grace Memorial Game Thread Forum
OTOH, how awesome does our pitching look?!!! -
OK, you got me there. But you Canadians really do need to learn how to spell.
-
I'm not trying to hate on Ortiz, but take a look at his postseason numbers by year. Yes, he has had some monster postseasons. He has also had postseasons with the following slash lines: .276/.276/.379 .191/.283/.362 .186/.327/.349 .083/.083/.083 So what is happening in those postseasons? Where is the clutch?
-
LOL Yes, I can see why traditionalists would be offended to be traditionalists. They should be. I'm just wondering if I'm still on your lawn.
-
Yes, they do. And I know where you're going with this. Have I told you how you can be so annoying with your logic sometimes? The studies that I reference use many years of data and many players worth of data to make the sample sizes significant. Clutch, or lack thereof, is not a repeatable skill.
-
I love you. That is all.
-
Stats are not bouncing in my head when I'm watching a game either. Well, not usually. When I'm watching a game, the emotional side of me takes over. I'm a fan just like anyone else.
-
Yes, we can make statements like the above. The numbers back those assertions up. A player that we often consider clutch isn't performing any better in those clutch situations than he would in a typical at bat. He is simply performing as he normally does.
-
I think a common misconception among traditionalists is that the analytic people don't really understand the game or that they can't truly appreciate and enjoy baseball. In most cases, nothing could be further from the truth. I have always had a good understanding and appreciation of the game, but I'm telling you, after I was introduced to the world of sabermetrics, that understanding and appreciation has grown tenfold. It absolutely has to be the two disciplines working together.
-
Well Bellhorn, SSS is a valid problem. It's not an excuse to not have to accept the notion of "clutch". And when that small sample is spread out over several seasons, it becomes even more of a problem. It's not really so much that stat geeks are saying that "clutch" doesn't exist. To date, however, they have dissected the data pretty much every way humanly possible, and have found no statistical evidence that being a clutch hitter is a repeatable skill. Clutch hits happen all the time, but being "clutch" is not a skill. Another difficulty lies in defining exactly what clutch is. Bill James even concedes that clutch may exist. There just hasn't been any proof to that effect yet.
-
At the risk of sounding really stupid, I don't know what you mean by being on your lawn.
-
While this is what should happen, in reality, it is often not what does happen. Right or wrong, a large part of the decision will be based on who has options. While I may not always like this, it makes sense. You want to keep as many options and as much flexibility on the roster as possible.
-
There are so many stats available at our fingertips, why anyone would choose not to use them is beyond me. It's amazing what kind of information is out there.
-
I agree, there are players who fold under pressure. I've played enough sports to know that. The players who cannot perform under pressure typically do not make it to the majors or if they do, they do not last very long. Players more or less will perform to their career norms in pressure situations, given a large enough sample size. Those players who we often consider to be clutch are not really clutch, they are just good hitters, period.
-
Unfortunately, Fred is not right.
-
Fred, Fred, Fred. Shaking my head. Let me first say that the RBI stat has it's place. It is just not a very useful stat to assess a player without have some context to go with it. I think a very good example of that was the year that your favorite player Lugo had more RBIs than Pedroia. More importantly, by the time players reach the MLB level, they are more or less all "clutch". In other words, the ones that are shaking in their cleats in pressure situations are either not going to make it to the majors or they are not going to last very long. A player cannot raise him game to an otherworldly level in a clutch situation. The good players simply maintain their composure and do what they normally do. Hitters who seem clutch are just typically good hitters. Papi is not a great clutch hitter. He is a great hitter, period.
-
I don't mind at all if you want to pick apart stats. As I said before, I enjoy the discussion/debate. That's why I'm here. I actually very much liked this post, because I was thinking the same thing about Napoli's at bats in those situations. I will be paying close attention to what he does. Just keep in mind that in most cases, the team is probably not playing for one run, so Naps should be swinging for the fences. But I will be using the eye test right along with you. Ha!
-
LOL Spud. Carry on then.
-
The Fellowship of the Miserable should be fair game then. ;-)
-
I'm guessing you're right.
-
Hate to say this Spud, but you have gone all Fred on me again.
-
Analytic guys are not always right. Scouts are not always right. In the case of Swisher, I don't think it was a 50-50 chance. I think that the chances of Swisher doing well were better than him not. An assessment made based on analytics. That's all I'm saying.
-
Because I thought they were interesting? I can't post things because I find them interesting?
-
cp, to say the Yankees got lucky with Swisher (although I won't argue against them being a very lucky team the past couple of years) is undermining the very nature of analytics. It wasn't blind luck. It wasn't a 50-50 chance that Swisher would perform well. It's a highly educated and informed decision based on data. The data doesn't tell the whole story, but it often tells the underlying story of why someone performed how they did and why some of the other numbers might not be a true representation of the player. These analytics guys know what they're doing. Give them some credit.
-
Some other Napoli stats, which I've been withholding from the general public. LOL With a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs, Napoli scored the runner 48% of the time for his career. The league average is 51%. However, Napoli's rate in 2014 was 64%. With a runner on 2nd and 0 outs, Napoli advanced the runner 51% of the time for his career. The league average is 56%. Napoli's 2014 rate was only 17%. Does this indicate anything about whether Napoli changes his approach or not? Not really, but interesting info at any rate.
